Bhupinder Jit Singh Sarao & Ors. v. The State of Haryana & Ors.

The case of the petitioners as per FIR (Annexure P-3) reads as under:- “This application is entered at serial no.304 POST dated 8.2.2008 Yamuna Nagar. To Respected Superintendent of Police, Yamuna Nagar. Application for registering FIR and taking action under Section 406/498-A, 506 and 34 Indian Penal Code against Bhupinderjit Singh Sarao s/o Sh.Ranjit Singh Sarao.

4. Ranjit Singh Sarao s/o Name not known Smt.Paramjit Kaur w/o Ranjit Singh Sarao Upinder Kaur d/o Ranjit Singh Sarao resident of H.No.1265/1 Sukh Dass Pura Mohalla Near B. Tank, Patiala (Punjab). Sir, it is submitted that applicants marriage was solemnized on 28.7.2007 with accused No.1 at Patiala. Accused No.2 and 3 are mother, father of accused No.1 and accused No.4 in his real sister. They all live together.

2. That at the time of marriage applicant’s parents had given enough costly items, Cash and Jewellery etc. as dowry these have been mentioned in the list ‘A’ and applicant’s in laws have also given jewellery etc. as gift to the applicant. These have been Crl.Misc.No.M-34264 of 2009 (O&M) 2 mentioned in the list ‘B’. All that Istri Dhan was handed over to accused in trust and applicant was assured that whenever the applicant will demand above Istri Dhan, they will give it to her and they willnot use it.

3. That before marriage, accused No.2 and 3 came to the residence of her parents at Jagadhari Workshop and asked for holding marriage at Patiala. The applicant’s parents had given Rs.1100/- to each person.

4. That after marriage, the applicant started living with accused no.1 as his wife, but accused were not happy for the dowry given to the applicant. Accused No.2 and 4 started taunting, “is this a dowry”, her parents should have given enough dowry. Applicant’s father is a big officer, brother is also Engineer, they have good income. Accused were expecting that enough articles and cash shall be given in dowry.

5. That on dated 30.7.2007 as per customs, for phara, applicant and all accused from her in laws came to the applicant’s parental house at Jagadhari Workshop. On dated 31.07.2007 they said they should get at least Eight lacs Rupees and the accused, in the presence of applicant’s parents and close relatives, threatened, abused her, and said she should ask and pressurize her parents to give in cash and asked that her parents should give Rs.8,00,000/- immediately. On this the applicant replied that her parents has already spent Rs.6-7 lacs on marriage and she will not ask them to give such amount. On this, accused cursed and threatened, the applicant should provide Rs.8,00,000/- to them from her parents.

6. That on dated 1.8.2007 applicants parents gave a draft of Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused and beside this golden chain and ring, and suit was given to the applicant’s mother-in-law, golden Karra, (Bracelet), Pant-shirt, to father in law and golden chain and suit to sister-in-law Upinder Kaur and said that they should not create harassment to the applicant for dowry. At that time, applicant’s maternal grand father Sh.Harkesh Singh Mehmi and Sh.Ajit Singh Sehgal, who is friend of applicant’s father, had come to see her, had also requested the accused to not to harass the applicant for dowry. While leaving, the accused threatened Crl.Misc.No.M-34264 of 2009 (O&M) 3 applicant’s parents that if in 2-3 days, Rs.8,00,000/- is not sent, it will be worse.

7. That as the applicant reached her in laws house, all the accused started cursing her and said when your father is a big officer, why he has given draft of Rs.1,00,000/- only, amount should have been given in cash. As the demand of Rs.8,00,000/- was not fulfilled, the applicant was abused by the accused, was kept hungry, thirsty and lodged in a room.

8. That on dated 3.8.2007, this ill-treatment came to the knowledge of the applicant’s parents, they went to the applicant’s in laws house, the accused, in their presence refused to keep the applicant as their daughter-in-law in their house, and said that till their above demand is fulfilled, they will not keep her. On this, the applicant’s parents tried to make them, understand, but the accused abused, insulted and asked them to get out from the house. The applicant was also ousted in three clothes from the house. The applicant has not been given anything and all her Istri Dhan has been kept by the accused. Applicant, since then is living in her parent’s house because the accused have threatened that if the applicant came to life in in-laws house she will be killed and buried there.

9. That even thereafter, the accused’s demand is “till applicant’s parents give Rs.8,00,000/- in cash, accused will not allow the applicant to live in her in-laws house” and are saying that the income of accused no.1 is more than Rs.80,000/- and he can be married in a wealthy family, from there they will get wealth and dowry as per their desire.

10. That the accused has totally refused to return the Istri Dhan of the applicant which was given in trust. And they, as the applicant has not fulfilled their dowry demand had beaten and tortured the applicant and are threatening to kill her. Thus, accused has committed crime under Sections 406, 498-A, 506 and 34 Indian Penal Code etc. Therefore, you are requested that keeping in vie the above, stringent action be taken by registering a case against the accused and justice be provided to the applicant and her Istri Dhan be also provided. Sd/-Gursharan Kaur.” Crl.Misc.No.M-34264 of 2009 (O&M) 4 Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that in fact, the complainant had lived with petitioner No.1 only for one night and had declined to consummate the marriage. In the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, the Apex Court has held as under:- “The following categories of cases can be stated by way of illustration wherein the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently chennelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised:- (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complainant, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Officer without an order of Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. Crl.Misc.No.M-34264 of 2009 (O&M) 5 (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is specific provision in the Code of the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceedings is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceedings should be exercised very sparingly an with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction or the court to act according to its whim or caprice.” A perusal of the FIR reveals that there are specific allegations against the petitioners with regard to harassment meted out to the complainant on account of dowry demand. Challan in this case has already been presented. In these circumstances, it is not a fit case where the FIR in question is liable to be quashed and scuttle the criminal proceedings at the very thresh hold Judge 19.02.2010 No ground for interference by this Court is made out. Dismissed. [ Sabina ] Crl.Misc.No.M-34264 of 2009 (O&M) 6